The answer, which will likely shock and then be ignored by most of our low-information media, is “E.”

The original RFRA was passed 20 years ago with overwhelming support by a Democratic-majority Congress, then signed into law by yet another Democrat, President Clinton. During a bi-partisan signing ceremony, Mr. Clinton said the following:

“We all have a shared desire here to protect perhaps the most precious of all American liberties — religious freedom. Usually the signing of legislation by a president is a ministerial act, often a quiet ending to a turbulent legislative process. Today this event assumes a more majestic quality because of our ability together to affirm the historic role that people of faith have played in the history of this country, and the constitutional protections those who profess and express their faith have always demanded and cherished. The free exercise of religion has been called the first freedom, that which originally sparked the development of the full range of the Bill of Rights.

“Our Founders cared a lot about religion. And one of the reasons they worked so hard to get the First Amendment into the Bill of Rights, at the head of the class, is that they well understood what could happen to this country, how both religion and government could be perverted if there were not some space created and some protection provided. We are, after all, the oldest democracy now in history and probably the most truly multiethnic society on the face of the Earth. And I am convinced that neither one of those things would be true today had it not been for the importance of the First Amendment. And the fact that we have kept faith with it for 200 years.”

And Mr. Clinton isn’t the only Democrat president who has supported RFRA. President Obama voted for similar legislation when he was in the Illinois Legislature. In fact, 19 states have RFRA laws on the books, including liberal states like Rhode Island, Pennsylvania and Connecticut. No member of that trio has voted Republican in a presidential election in almost 30 years.

So why is Indiana being singled out by the tolerance mob for scorn and boycott?

Chalk that up to the religious bigots who populate much of our lamestream media these days. When you combine their secular bias with their ignorance about the issue of religious freedom, and the U.S. Constitution that protects it, you get a contrived hysteria like we are seeing now.

These three people in particular should be singled out and called out for their special kind of stupid:

Each of them urged the NCAA to pull out of Indiana – including this weekend’s Final Four – in response to legislation that simply reasserts that the First Amendment is still law. You know, the same First Amendment that gives them the freedom to spew the total tomfoolery they call “journalism.”

For if these individuals are really serious about removing sporting events from every state that has a RFRA, it’s going to be a long list:

We’re going to need a new home for the Kentucky Derby.

New Orleans is considered by many to be the ideal city for hosting the Super Bowl, but with Louisiana having its own RFRA there will be no more French Quarter for you.

I guess ya’ll will have to stop covering Nick Saban’s top-notch Crimson Tide football program, since Alabama has one, too.

Cross popular, warm-weather locales like Arizona, Texas and Florida off the list.

Mr. Olbermann is going to have to boycott his own employer, ESPN, since their headquarters are in Bristol, Connecticut.

The Big Ten Conference said it’s reconsidering whether to keep its football championship in Indianapolis. But the Big Ten’s offices have been in Illinois for many years now, which is another state that has a RFRA.

It’s obvious some folks were so busy earning their politically correct merit badges from the Marxist Media echo chamber, they forgot to do what we used to call in this business “research.” Furthermore, in their zeal to show how they’re willing to tolerate everyone except Christians, it’s also clear they haven’t really thought through what they’re advocating for.

For example, do these same people want government to force a Jewish kosher deli owner to handle and serve non-Kosher foods? If so, they’re a bunch of anti-Semites.

Do these same people want government to force a black business owner to serve a white supremacist conference? If so, they’re a bunch of racists.

Do these same people want government to force a homosexual print shop owner to make the vile paraphernalia for the Westboro hate-mongers? If so, now they’re a bunch of homophobes, too.

By calling on organizations like the NCAA to cease doing business with the state of Indiana, these journalists are calling upon the same “freedom of association” they’re claiming doesn’t exist for Christian business owners. And while we’re on the subject of hypocrisy, I’m old enough to remember when we were promised that granting homosexuals “the freedom to marry” wouldn’t cost anyone else their freedom.

But that’s like so 2010, dude. The “right side of history” evolves fast these days. Best to cease bitterly clinging to those guns and Bibles that are weighing you down so you can keep up.

Finally, RFRA laws predate and transcend the current marriage debate. The one signed by Mr. Clinton 20 years ago is what the U.S. Supreme Court used to side with Hobby Lobby over the Obama administration last year on the question of paying for abortifacients. So by pretending RFRA laws like Indiana’s are only about exempting Christians from violating their conscience on the issue of marriage and not equally valid for other faiths/issues, these Leftist journalists are admitting they have been lying to us about their true motives all this time.

Turns out Christians were the target of their secular jihad all along. So much for diversity. If you will not conform, then you will be made to care.

These hacks only win by bullying us into silence. Call their bluff, because they don’t have an intellectual or constitutional leg to stand on.

Author

Steve Deace is one of the "Heavy Hundred" talk show hosts in America according Talkers Magazine. His influence in the first in the nation Iowa Caucuses has been profiled in much of the national media, and he's also a columnist for The Washington Times. His new book, out now and endorsed by a who's who of conservative leaders, is titled Rules for Patriots: How Conservatives Can Win Again.

Posting Policy

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.